lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 14:24:36 +0800 From: Feng Gao <gfree.wind@...il.com> To: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@...halink.fr> Cc: Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com>, jchapman@...alix.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Philp Prindeville <philipp@...fish-solutions.com>, Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] l2tp: Use existing macros instead of literal number Sorry, I forget to modify the title. I will sent another update. On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Guillaume Nault <g.nault@...halink.fr> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:55:26PM +0800, fgao@...ai8.com wrote: >> From: Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com> >> >> 1. Use PPP_ALLSTATIONS/PPP_UI instead of literal 0xff/0x03; >> 2. Use one static const global fixed_ppphdr instead of two same >> static variable ppph in two different functions; >> 3. Use SEND_SHUTDOWN instead of literal 2; >> >> Signed-off-by: Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com> >> --- >> v1: Initial patch >> > v1 again? > > BTW, no need to number your patch for a single patch series. > But you have to tell which tree is the series for. > > So instead of [PATCH v1 1/1], you should send [PATCH v2 net-next].
Powered by blists - more mailing lists